Reading Rockets - About readinghttp://www.readingrockets.org/keywords/about-reading
enDoes Homework Improve Reading Achievement?http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/does-homework-improve-reading-achievement
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Does Homework Improve Reading Achievement?</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-11-29T11:30:00-05:00">November 29, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><div><strong>Letter to Shanahan:</strong></div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>Our school is in review which means that we have to improve reading test performance — or else. We are doing some crazy things with test preparation (that I know you disagree with), but we have also been ordered to put a big emphasis on reading homework. I’ve never been a big fan of homework because not all the kids do it and that doesn’t seem fair. What do you think about this strategy?</em></div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><strong>Shanahan's response:</strong></div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Studies of homework have been thoroughly analyzed by Harris Cooper. This is an area where I can provide the researcher’s well-honed answer: Does homework improve achievement? That depends …</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I wish you had included your grade levels, because the effectiveness of homework in improving reading achievement depends a lot on that. For instance, generally studies have not been especially kind to homework in the primary grades. If the goal is better reading achievement, then a big emphasis on reading homework in K-2 might not be such a great choice (more on this later).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>That starts to change as one transitions into the upper grades, presumably because students are more able to apply their reading skills independently. In grades 3-8, homework has a fairly consistent impact on achievement — and the payoff tends to increase as students advance through the grades (but so does the amount of homework time needed — more on that later, too).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>In high school, the payoffs get even bigger, but not until students are doing more than an hour of homework per night; up to that amount, there seems to be little learning benefit.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>It is clear that homework for young children is unlikely to payoff in greater learning. However, many teachers that I work with argue for homework in the early grades as a way of socializing kids into schooling. Their idea is that the students should get used to homework since at some point it really does have learning value.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Having watched my own kids with their early homework, I think this makes great sense. Young kids love homework — it seems so grown up to them. I like the idea of getting them into a routine of taking care of their homework when they get home. In other words, the idea with those assignments is to teach responsibility rather than reading. That might not show up on your school’s tests right away, but it may pay some real long-term benefits.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Some of the biggest arguments over homework tend to be linked to how much homework is appropriate. Here I rely on Cooper as well. He has suggested that the old school saw that ten minutes of homework per grade level is sound is in good alignment with research. That means in grade 1, kids would do 10 minutes of homework per night, in second grade it would be 20, third grade 30 and so on. That sounds good to me, both pedagogically and from a busy parent’s point of view.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>When I entered teaching, the concern you expressed about kids who don’t do homework was widely held. (One of my colleagues, who had taken homework assignments to a truant child was ordered off the property at gunpoint: “He can do your school stuff at school and his home stuff at home.")</div>
<div>Despite that, over time, I have changed my mind about homework. Homework is beneficial to kids, at least at some ages. Holding back something beneficial just because not everyone will or can take advantage of it seems wrongheaded to me now. (Grading homework is another issue. It would be unfair to grade kids based upon how well-organized and supportive their homes are.)</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>To increase your hit rate, keep parents and guardians informed about the importance of homework (and how much of it there will be and when it will come home). Telling the parents this directly can pay real dividends, as their children will not necessarily let them in on the secret.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Level with parents. Let them know that you understand that there are nights that get out of hand and homework just can’t get done, and that you won’t punish their child for that. Tell them you’d appreciate a note from home when that happens. However, also stress the learning benefits to their kids.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Having someone else do the homework also happens when a child can’t figure out how to do an assignment. Some kids are terrified in such situations. Encourage parents that instead of having someone else do the work, encourage their children to come to you at the very beginning of the school day — before you are even collecting homework — to show you what they had trouble with. Great teaching opportunities arise from less.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Homework can becomes a terrible system of communication, sort of like an unreliable pony express for parents and teachers. The teacher sends homework. For some reason, the homework isn’t going to be done that night. Mom doesn’t want the teacher to think she doesn’t care, so she does it herself or has an older sister do it. Voilà, homework completed! The teacher looks at the homework that obviously wasn’t done by her student and from this assumes mom doesn’t care. Yikes.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Try to break out of that vicious circle with parents. If everyone is on the same page about what is going on, you’ll see more homework completion.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>What if mom and dad aren’t so great with English? That might mean they can’t get overly involved in homework assignments. If you can’t read the passages, you can’t tell if your child has answered the questions correctly. But they can tell if the homework has been completed and I would encourage parents in that situation to do what they can. Even that kind of involvement and support can make a difference in their kids’ enthusiasm and effort.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I would also suggest trying to make sure homework assignments are worthwhile. That means keeping them clear and easy enough that they can be completed at home, and demanding enough that they can lead to learning.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>For instance, in the primary grades I don’t accept the research finding that homework doesn’t improve reading. That certainly is usually true, but there have been exceptions. For example, Keith Topping’s work on sending home reading books for nightly fluency practice with 7-year-olds suggests one possibility. Set it up so kids have someone at home to read aloud to nightly.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Or, a suburban principal I know had the parents of first-graders focused on practicing sight vocabulary for about 10 minutes per night. Amazing how that sped up these young children’s reading development — freeing up teacher time to focus on more complex aspects of reading.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>As kids move up the grades, this gets easier, of course, because kids can read and write more independently. Increasing the amount of accountable reading students do — reading and answering questions, reading and preparing discussion notes, reading and writing — can really expand opportunity to learn.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Final word: I was working with a middle school last year where the textbook-based math homework was often incomplete because neither students nor parents knew what to do! I’m not complaining about the lack of home math knowledge here, but about unclear assignments. That kind of confusion often happens in the primary grades with reading worksheets, too. I’ve seen mothers cry over that one — they just want to help their kids and they feel stupid and embarrassed when they can’t. The lack of written directions, since the little ones can’t read yet, can be a real problem with moms. Please look hard at your assignments and make sure someone who is not a teacher can figure out what is required. It matters.</div>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/early-literacy-development" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Early literacy development</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/parent-engagement" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Parent engagement</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 16:30:02 +0000tchovanec140434 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/does-homework-improve-reading-achievement#commentsAn Argument about Independent Reading Time During the School Day http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/argument-about-independent-reading-time-during-school-day
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>An Argument about Independent Reading Time During the School Day </h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-10-11T14:15:00-04:00">October 11, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><div><a href="http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/does-independent-reading-time-during-school-day-create-lifelong-readers">Last week</a> I answered a teacher’s question about free reading time during the school day and its relationship to reading motivation (e.g., making kids like reading). I pointed out that such reading time has a rather weak relationship with learning (various kinds of instruction exert about an 800% greater influence on learning than on having kids reading on their own during the school day) and that the connection with motivation appears to be even more tenuous. I then compared the DEAR/SSR practice unfavorably with theories and research on what motivates human beings.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Not surprisingly that generated much comment. Although the following was not sent to me, it was so addressed and posted at the blog site of Gwen Flaskamp, a practicing teacher. She is evidently passionate about this practice, and I think her posting deserves a response. I have quoted liberally from her posting below in italics—and have interspersed my responses throughout. To read her complete statement in its entirety, please follow this link: <a href="http://d96literacylink.blogspot.no/2016/10/my-letter-to-tim-shanahan-in-defense-of.html" target="_blank">My Letter To Tim Shanahan: In Defense of Independent Reading.</a></div>
<h3>From Flaskamp's blog</h3>
<div><em>Recently, I read the latest blog post by Tim Shanahan where he provides his strong opinions how giving students time to independently read in class is wasteful. Although I usually value his opinions and have referenced him several times on my blog, I had a strong, visceral response to his latest piece…. I felt compelled to stand up for the inclusion of independent reading time during the school day. Thus, I crafted this letter. I'm hoping he reads it. &nbsp;</em><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>But, more importantly, I'm hoping that teachers who wish to instill lifelong reading habits in their students do not stop with Mr. Shanahan's advice and consider my perspective and the perspective of others on this important topic.</em><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>Dear Mr. Shanahan,</em><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>I think you sound like an impolite blogger, and perhaps a misinformed one. </em><em>You've neglected to consider the following important points in your discussion of the value of independent reading.</em><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>You claim that time spent independent reading is wasted due to the fact that "even when they have been done well, the "learning payoffs" have been small. By "learning payoffs," I am assuming that you mean students' progress on standardized exams (typically the way reading growth is measured in research studies) does not increase with the inclusion of independent reading time in schools.&nbsp;</em><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div><em>Some major problems exist with this claim.</em></div>
<ul>
<li><em>Increased reading does lead to increased achievement.</em></li>
<li><em>Research&nbsp;does&nbsp;support the idea that students who typically achieve higher on reading tests are also those who read more voraciously. Those who score at the lower end usually read less.</em></li>
</ul>
<h3>Shanahan's response</h3>
<div>Dear Ms. Flaskamp,</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Thanks for writing. There are several problems with your claims up to this point.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>That good readers read more than poor readers is true, but has no bearing on my response to that teacher’s question. Correlation doesn’t prove causation. That good readers read more does not mean that it was reading more that made them good readers. Maybe good readers choose to read more because they can do it well. You are making a good argument for teaching everyone to read well, not for sending kids off to read on their own during the school day.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>You are citing very selectively here. You refer to the correlational studies that can’t answer the question, while ignoring the experimental ones that have directly tested your theory. Studies in which DEAR time is provided to some kids but not to others have not found much payoff — even when the non-readers were doing no more than random worksheets!</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>You seem to be claiming that since reading on one’s own leads to improved achievement — then any and all approaches to encouraging reading must be effective. Following that logic, then telling kids to read on their own, buying books for them, rewarding them with pizzas, or employing electric cattle prods… all must work, too.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Remember I wasn’t saying kids shouldn’t read, only that requiring “independent reading” during the school day has not been effective. Only one study bothered to check its impact on amount of reading, and it found that middle school kids read less as a result of the practice — since it reduced the amount of reading they did on their own.</div>
<div>As a parent and grandparent, I’d rather that teachers reacted intellectually rather than “viscerally” to questions about instructional practices. Similarly, I hope my physician will be visceral about my health and well-being, but not about his pills and scalpels.</div>
<div>__________________________________</div>
<h3>From Flaskamp's blog</h3>
<div><em>Since research also shows that the amount of time middle school students typically spend reading outside of class declines as they grow older, finding time for students to practice reading independently in schools is crucial. &nbsp;If we do not attempt to foster a love of reading inside the classroom, how will we help students who have not yet discovered the joy of reading on their own increase their reading minutes?</em></div>
<h3>Shanahan's response</h3>
<div>Indeed, that is a great question. Given that we know this method hasn’t improved achievement or made kids like reading, then why cling so tightly to it? Or, given that DEAR time has been so ubiquitous in elementary classrooms for the past generation, how is it possible that middle school students are reading so little? If this practice so powerfully fosters “a love of reading” among kids that lasts a lifetime, then why aren’t years of it lasting even until kids are 12?</div>
<div>________________________________</div>
<h3>From Flaskamp's blog</h3>
<div><em>I'm sure you are aware that much research exists linking student engagement (i.e. motivation) to increases in learning. Thus, spending time on increasing student motivation should, in fact, lead to increases in achievement.</em></div>
<h3>Shanahan's response</h3>
<div>That makes sense to me, and yet studies show that this particular approach accomplishes neither. That might mean that what you are so certain must be motivational for all kids, maybe isn’t. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
<div>________________________________</div>
<h3>From Flaskamp's blog</h3>
<div><em>You advise teachers that "&nbsp;If you don’t want kids to love reading, then sacrifice their instructional time to focus on motivation rather than learning." This argument, although cleverly disguised, is a type we would use with students when poking holes in an argument and is a type of logical fallacy. Your argument seems to suggest that teachers can focus either on motivation or on learning. Can we not focus on both?...”</em></div>
<h3>Shanahan's response</h3>
<div>Your analysis of my argument is flawed. We are in agreement that we can focus on motivation and learning simultaneously. Where we disagree is whether you can do that with a procedure that has failed to successfully foster either motivation or learning.</div>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/motivation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Motivation</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 11 Oct 2016 18:29:09 +0000tchovanec140157 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/argument-about-independent-reading-time-during-school-day#commentsDoug Lemov Interviews Tim Shanahan http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/doug-lemov-interviews-tim-shanahan
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Doug Lemov Interviews Tim Shanahan </h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-09-27T15:30:00-04:00">September 27, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>Usually these blog entries are replies to educators questions. Recently Doug Lemov interviewed me about reading instruction and posted it on his blog. We got into issues like reading strategy instruction, vocabulary assessment, close reading, and guided reading. Many of you know Doug's books, <i>Teach Like a Champion </i>and<i> Reading Revisited. </i>I was honored to talk to him and this will serve as a good introduction to Doug and his site as well as to useful info about these hot literacy topics.</p>
<p><a href="http://teachlikeachampion.com/blog/minutes-tim-shanahan/" target="_blank">A Few Minutes with Literacy Expert Tim Shanahan &gt;</a></p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/classroom-strategies" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Classroom strategies</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/comprehension" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Comprehension</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/vocabulary" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Vocabulary</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 27 Sep 2016 19:30:52 +0000tchovanec140107 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/doug-lemov-interviews-tim-shanahan#commentsWhy How Many Minutes of Teaching Something Isn't the First Thing to Ask of Researchhttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-how-many-minutes-teaching-something-isnt-first-thing-ask-research
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Why How Many Minutes of Teaching Something Isn&#039;t the First Thing to Ask of Research</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-09-16T11:30:00-04:00">September 16, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p><strong>Question:</strong></p>
<p><em>I am now director of literacy in my district. I am advocating for interactive read alouds, shared reading, guided reading, and similar activities in our primary grades (K-3). Is there a research base that would allow me to determine how many minutes of these activities I should prescribe? Could you provide me with a copy of that research?</em></p>
<p><strong>Shanahan's response:</strong></p>
<p>Yikes, Madam, I suspect that your cart has gotten before your horse.</p>
<p>If research says a particular activity provides kids with a clear learning benefit, then wondering how much of a good thing is appropriate is a smart question, and one not asked often enough. But before you get there, you should first ask: Does the research show that these activities are beneficial at all?</p>
<p>I assume by “interactive read alouds” and “shared reading” that you want your primary grade teachers reading texts aloud to kids in a dialogic manner ... that is interspersing and following up these read alouds with questions and discussion.</p>
<p>I am a big fan of reading to kids (did so every day I taught school and read a huge amount to my own kids). But I’m also a big fan of teaching kids to read, and while these two propositions are not contradictory, they are not the same either.</p>
<p>Research on reading aloud to preschoolers and kindergartners is quite supportive (Bus and van IJzendoorn, 1995; National Early Literacy Panel, 2008; Scarborough and Dobrich, 1994), though none of those studies show any impact on reading achievement. In fact, it is rare that shared reading studies even attempt to measure reading. That should not be surprising given the children’s ages, but it should give pause to those who want to prescribe shared reading in grades 1-3, at least if improved reading achievement is the purpose.</p>
<p>The NELP meta-analyses, the most rigorous and recent of the three, should provide a clear picture of what is known. It found that across 16 studies, reading aloud to young kids led to clear improvements in oral language (mainly better receptive vocabulary—a measure not closely aligned to reading achievement during the primary grade years), and across 4 studies, it led to improvements in print awareness (like recognizing proper directionality). That’s it.</p>
<p>Studies of shared reading with kids in Grades 1 to 3 have been rare, but what is there is not particularly promising. Studies generally report no benefits with regard to reading achievement (e.g., Baker, Mackler, Sonneschein, and Serpell, 2001; Senechal and Young, 2008). Replacing reading instruction with teacher read alouds is simply not a good idea in the primary grades.</p>
<p>(Note: I mentioned that I have always read a lot to kids, and I’d continue to do so if in the classroom today. But not because I purport that it improves reading. It is a way of building relationships between the reader and listener, for setting a tone in a classroom environment, and for exposing students to aesthetically pleasing and intellectually stimulating language and ideas.)</p>
<p>The same could be said about “guided reading,” but here it depends greatly upon what one means by the term. It was originally coined by basal reader publishers to describe their lesson plans; I think Dick and Jane got there first, but by the 1950s several programs had “guided reading” lessons or “directed reading” lessons. However, these days due to the popularity of Fountas &amp; Pinnell’s practical advice many think of guided reading as small group instruction or teaching students to read with texts at “their levels.” I would give different amounts for these two very different practices.</p>
<p>Essentially, guided reading has long meant that kids were going to read a story, chapter, or article under teacher supervision. For instance, the teacher might preteach some of the vocabulary to ease the children’s way. Reading purposes might be set (“read to find out what this family did on their vacation”), and questions might be asked at key points.</p>
<p>I cannot imagine teaching reading without some kind of guided reading practice, but we don’t have studies of the general practice.</p>
<p>Of course, some guided reading features have been studied. We know something about the kinds of questions that are most productive, and preteaching of vocabulary gets good marks.</p>
<p>However, for those to whom guided reading refers to grouping kids by reading levels, I would suggest reading up on the impact of such practices. Teaching kids grouped by reading level has been ineffective in improving reading achievement and damaging in terms of equity (Gamoran, 1992).</p>
<p>So, if you are asking how many minutes teachers should guide kids in the reading of stories or social studies chapters, I don’t have a research-based answer. It seems clear that such practices can be beneficial, but any guidance on amount would have to be practical rather than empirical.</p>
<p>But if you are asking about how much of this kind of reading should be done in reading level groups, then the answer would be as little as possible given the lack of benefit and potential damage of the practice.</p>
<p>Your question about how many minutes is a good one. Educators too rarely interrogate the research to find out how much of something is worth doing.</p>
<p>But, before you can get to that question, you need to ask whether a practice is really a good one in the first place. This is especially important if you prefer a practice, since such affection can elbow aside evidence.</p>
<p>If you are truly dedicated to following evidence, rather than using it as a cudgel to get teachers to adopt your preferred practices, then you should be wary of mandating these specific approaches.</p>
<p><strong>References</strong></p>
<p>Baker, L., Mackler, K., Sonneschein, S., and Serpell, R. (2001). Parents’ interactions with their first-grade children during storybook reading and relations with subsequent home reading activity and reading achievement. <em>Journal of School Psychology, 39,</em>415-438.</p>
<p>Bus, A.G., and van IJzendoorn, M.H. (1995). Joint book reading makes for success in learning to read: A meta-analysis on intergenerational transmission of literacy. <em>Review of Educational Research, 65,</em> 1-21.</p>
<p>Gamoran, A. (1992). Untracking for equity. <em>Educational Leadership, 50,</em> 11-17.</p>
<p>National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). <em>Developing early literacy.</em> Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.</p>
<p>Scarborough, H.S. and Dobrich, W. (1994). On the efficacy of reading to preschoolers. <em>Developmental Review, 14,</em> 145-302.</p>
<p>Senechal, M. and Young, L. (2008). The Effect of Family Literacy Interventions on Children’s Acquisition of Reading From Kindergarten to Grade 3: A Meta-Analytic Review. <em>Review of Educational Research, 78,</em> 880-907.</p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/reading-together" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Reading together</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/school-wide-efforts" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">School-wide efforts</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:36:58 +0000tchovanec140076 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-how-many-minutes-teaching-something-isnt-first-thing-ask-research#commentsThe Role of Early Oral Language in Reading Comprehension http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/role-early-oral-language-reading-comprehension
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>The Role of Early Oral Language in Reading Comprehension </h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-08-15T13:45:00-04:00">August 15, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>When I was 18 years old, I was a volunteer tutor in an inner-city school. I wasn’t an education major — that came later — but I was intent on saving the world. I was excited about the idea of going into the city and working with elementary school kids who were growing up in poverty.</p>
<p>But I was also nervous about it. I didn’t know a damn thing about working with kids, the inner city, or reading. A trifecta of ignorance.</p>
<p>I decided to school myself the evening before my first day of tutoring, so I went to the university library and looked for some books on the teaching of reading. I found two that seemed pertinent and I checked them out.</p>
<p>One was Rudolph Flesch’s <em>Why Johnny Can’t Read</em> and the other was Roach Van and Claryce Allen’s <em>Language Experiences in Early Childhood.</em> At the time I couldn’t have found two more separate takes on early reading: Flesch’s convincing polemic on the need for explicit phonics instruction and the Allen’s romantic homage to the role of early language development.</p>
<p>It turns out I was also ignorant about philosophical differences. I was scrambling to figure out what to do and these books — as far apart as they may have been — were pointing me in practical, if seemingly incommensurate, directions.</p>
<p>Now, 47 years later, with lots of knowledge and experience, I’m back to where I started. I no longer see them as incommensurate (again). Decoding and language, language and decoding … it’s like those television commercials: “tastes great, less filling” or “peanut butter, chocolate.” Sometimes the complementary just makes good sense.</p>
<p>Recently, Chris Lonigan and I wrote a short article for <em>Language Magazine</em>. It’s focus is on “The Role of Early Oral Language in Literacy Development.” I think both Chris and I have bona fides in the “phonics/decoding/foundational skills” community and have the scars to show it. But we are both also advocates of the so-called “simple view” of reading — students need to know how to decode from print to language and they need to know how to understand language. This is a both, not an either/or.</p>
<p>Here is a <a href="http://languagemagazine.com/?page_id=5100" target="_blank">link to the article</a>. Hope you enjoy it.</p>
<p> </p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/early-literacy-development" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Early literacy development</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/oral-language" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Oral Language</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/phonics-decoding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonics &amp; decoding</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/teacher-education" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Teacher education</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Mon, 15 Aug 2016 17:52:02 +0000tchovanec139967 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/role-early-oral-language-reading-comprehension#commentsWhy an Overemphasis on Foundational Reading Skills Isn't Healthy for Kidshttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-overemphasis-foundational-reading-skills-isnt-healthy-kids
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Why an Overemphasis on Foundational Reading Skills Isn&#039;t Healthy for Kids</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-08-08T12:00:00-04:00">August 8, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p><strong>Principal's question:</strong></p>
<p><em>District leadership has advised primary teachers to focus on the Foundational Skills Strand, and de-emphasize the other strands. The belief is that if students go into Grade 3 having mastered foundational skills, they will be prepared to master the rigor of the other strands.</em></p>
<p><em>As the principal, the message I'm considering sending is to teach all strands, closely monitoring foundational skills with DIBELS, immediately addressing gaps. Students who are meeting foundational skills standards may spend more time in other strands while those struggling get focused support in assessed areas of foundational skills difficulty. Does that sound reasonable?</em></p>
<p><em>I'm concerned that de-emphasizing the other strands will make it hard for students to catch up in third grade, and many students may lose interest if not exposed to a variety of thought-provoking work. On the other hand, I understand the immense importance of systematic, explicit instruction in the foundational skills- and know they must be a focus in early years.</em></p>
<p><em>All that said, can you give a guideline as to the percent of the E/LA time that should be spent on foundational skills for the "typical" primary student? Our district adopted Benchmark Advance, which looks to me as though it does NOT emphasize the foundational skills. I would like to give teachers a time guideline for initial whole-group instruction in foundational skills so we know how much we may need to supplement with other curriculum.</em></p>
<p><strong>Shanahan’s response:</strong></p>
<p>Imagine if district leadership advised the cafeteria crew to focus on calcium only, and to de-emphasize the other nutrients? Their belief might be that if students reached the age of 8 without strong teeth and bones, they would not be prepared for the later rigors of eating grains, meats, and vegetables.</p>
<p>You’d be writing to me to find out if it’s okay to serve cereals with the morning milk and green beans at lunch. And, let's face it, these kid's autopsies would likely reveal strong teeth and bones.</p>
<p>Sadly, this analogy is apt.</p>
<p>Of course, one can put all the primary grade focus on some skills to try to advance progress in those skills, just as one could put all the emphasis on some nutrients to promote some health needs over others. Doing so won't accomplish the real goal, but it might fool some observers into thinking it has been reached.</p>
<p>Here are some facts worth knowing:</p>
<p><strong>In the 1960s, the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) began a rigorous analysis of beginning reading in an effort to identify how effectively to avoid or to address learning problems.</strong></p>
<p>This coordinated effort is generally credited with much of the progress that has been made in understanding the role that skills like phonological awareness play in reading and the value of explicit phonics instruction.</p>
<p>One important finding of that effort: addressing only students’ phonological/orthographic needs during the primary grade years leaves those students vulnerable to continued reading disability (due to a lack attention to their language development). There either are usually undiagnosed language deficits early on, that become more evident later, or the inattention to non-foundational skills limits their growth during these years.</p>
<p>I don’t think anyone can read that body of research without concluding both that kids need substantial attention to foundational skills early on, AND that solely focusing on such skills would be harmful.</p>
<p><strong>The National Reading Panel was pressed into service to review research on what works in reading at the request of the U.S. Congress, under the auspices of NICHD and the U.S. Department of Education.</strong></p>
<p>Unlike many of the critics at the time, panel members, who were unpaid volunteers, were not allowed to have any potential conflicting commercial interests. That panel reviewed 51 studies of the teaching of phonemic awareness, 38 studies of phonics, and 32 studies of oral reading fluency.</p>
<p>The panel concluded that students would benefit from explicit, systematic instruction in each of those foundational skills during the primary grades. However, it should be noted that in no case within those studies did anyone consider those skills as separable from the rest of reading. For example, when studying phonics, the students in the control groups and the phonics groups were receiving instruction in vocabulary, comprehension, writing and the like. The only difference was that the experimental group would be getting phonics or some more ambitious version of phonics.</p>
<p>Thus, the panel’s conclusion that these skills need to be taught was determined in the context of these skills being taught <em>along with other reading skills.</em> Such a heavy focus on any of these skills to the omission of the others likely would have led to very different conclusions.</p>
<p><strong>Over my career, I have worked with some of the biggest proponents of foundational skills teaching:</strong></p>
<p>Patricia Cunningham, Linnea Ehri, Jack Fletcher, Barbara Foorman, David Francis, Douglas Fuchs, Lynn Fuchs, Christopher Lonigan, Louisa Moats, Michael Pressley, Christopher Schatschneider, Sally Shaywitz, Steve Stahl, Keith Stanovich, Joseph Torgesen, Sharon Vaughn, and others.</p>
<p>These brilliant men and women disagree — with me and with each other — on many issues, but they seem to all be in agreement that the foundational skills are NECESSARY for learning to read (so you'd better make sure kids are instructed in them), BUT THAT THEY ALONE ARE NOT SUFFICIENT for learning to read (so you'd better do more for kids' reading than teach them foundational skills).</p>
<p><strong>I have long been an advocate for providing children with 120-180 minutes per day of literacy instruction. </strong>I divide that time roughly in quarters: 25% devoted to words and word parts (e.g., letters, sounds, decoding, PA); 25% to oral reading fluency; 25% to reading comprehension; and 25% to writing. That means that primary grade kids would receive about 60 to 90 minutes per day of foundational skills instruction (combining the word work with the fluency work).</p>
<p>There are variants on this scheme. For example, Joe Torgesen touched it up by advocating 2 hours of daily literacy instruction, with up to a third hour dedicated to remediation in those foundational skills. Thus, your idea of giving some kids more foundational work beyond the amount that everyone receives in class makes great sense and can easily be accommodated in this plan. However, ignoring essential skills that can't easily be tested to focus on ones that can be, won't help kids much.</p>
<p>I sympathize with your administrators. They want a quick fix. Sadly, the positive third-grade reading data that they are imagining would at best be briefly hiding their failure. Sort of like painting over the rot in a wooden porch; the paint will make it look nice, but it won't keep the steps from soon collapsing. In addressing a problem, you must recognize what is necessary, as well as what is insufficient.</p>
<p><em>Pass the green beans, please!</em></p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/assessment-evaluation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Assessment &amp; evaluation</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/comprehension" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Comprehension</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/fluency" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Fluency</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/phonemic-awareness" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonemic awareness</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/phonics-decoding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonics &amp; decoding</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/school-wide-efforts" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">School-wide efforts</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/struggling-readers" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Struggling readers</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/vocabulary" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Vocabulary</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/writing" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Writing</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Mon, 08 Aug 2016 16:08:25 +0000tchovanec139942 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-overemphasis-foundational-reading-skills-isnt-healthy-kids#commentsThe Slow Path Forward: We Can — and Do — Learn from Reading Researchhttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/slow-path-forward-we-can-and-do-learn-reading-research
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>The Slow Path Forward: We Can — and Do — Learn from Reading Research</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-07-05T14:30:00-04:00">July 5, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><div>We in education tend to have very strong beliefs. And, those beliefs can overwhelm our knowledge — or even our willingness to gain knowledge.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Last week’s entry here focused on teaching kids with more challenging texts than we’ve been told to use in the past. The reason for the change wasn’t some brilliant insight on my part, but a gradual accumulation of direct research evidence. Evidence that shows beyond beginning reading there is no benefit to controlling the difficulty of texts in the way that we have done — matching kids to books with various accuracy criteria.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I certainly understand the suspicions of those who have long been told that kids can’t progress unless taught at their “instructional levels.” What I don’t get is the unwillingness of some to even consider such an idea given the evidence.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I got a kick out of one reader who led with her wonder rather than her disbelief. She did something crazy: she tried my advice. She placed students in harder texts and provided them the support and motivation to succeed and the kids did well. So far so good. Over time, if she continues to try it, I think she’ll find that she can get her students to higher levels of achievement than in the past.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Her note came in right at the time I was reading a newspaper article on reading, one printed in 1951 — the same year I was born. It even quoted Helen Robinson, whose research I have long admired. However, it contained so much baloney that it gave me hope — we are learning, we are making progress. The only way to do that, of course, is to reduce the strength of our beliefs, and to increase our reliance on data. Here is what we were telling people in 1951. I follow it with my own comments. &nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<hr />
<h2>Let Teacher Help Child's Reading</h2>
<div>by&nbsp;Marcia Winn&nbsp;</div>
<div>Sept 11, 1951</div>
<h3>Home Interference May Handicap</h3>
<div>A number of years ago when this writer was 10, a neighbor accosted her. Billy, who was 7 and halfway thru the second grade still couldn't read. Would she, the learned one of 10, take over Billy for the summer and see if she could improve his reading.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Billy's mother thought it would be nice if he could learn to spell at the same time.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>The offer, made terribly tempting by a remuneration of 50 cents a week [an hour a day of dear little Billy], was snatched up. So all thru the hot summer Billy and his tutor read and spelled. He had a nice time, and she was 50 cents a week richer, and he ended up reading and spelling with great facility. Don't ask us why. Maybe he merely wanted to get back to the empty lot next door and play ball.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Were Billy 7 and half way thru the second grade today, the reading experts would protest such high-handed treatment. In the first place, if Billy is half way thru the second grade and can’t read, he is no problem. He simply isn't "ready" for reading. He's not a problem, remedially speaking, until he is in the third grade. Then he needs help only because in the fourth grade he’ll need his reading for what is described as " a wide variety of content subjects," whatever that means. One assumes he’ll need his reading to read.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Secondly, the reading experts of today say Billy's reading should be a hands-off subject at home. Let teacher do it, not mummy.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>If you worry because your child seems slow in grasping reading, talk to his teacher, not to him, Mrs. Helen Robinson, director of the reading clinics at the University of Chicago, advises. If you attempt to take matters into your own hands by reading with him, all you’ll do is upset him. Naturally you’ll read better he. You’ve been at it for years.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>"Often this business of reading with the child threatens his security," Mrs. Robinson says. "The parent identifies himself with the child. The popular opinion is that the child who doesn't learn to read easily is of low mentality. The parent suspects this. I've seen a mother burst into tears when assured that her child’s I.Q. really was quite normal."</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Many parents try to help by spelling out the letters of the word [c-a-t, cat]. You may have learned to read this way, but Mrs. Robinson says that such home teaching is one of the major handicaps the remedial teachers have to overcome. Spelling does not precede reading she emphasizes; it follows it.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Instead, Mrs. Robinson suggests, see what your child’s teacher wants you to do. [There's no point in getting your convictions gummed up with the whole school system; Billy is not going to learn the way you learned, and that’s that. He may emerge a better reader than you, or a poorer one, but whichever way, it’s today’s soup, and you can’t change it.] The teacher may want you to read aloud to him, not with him. She may say he is lacking in his background of experience and language. She may advise excursions on which you name every object.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Reading, Mrs. Robinson says, is a language skill that depends upon vocabulary. A barren language does nothing. A child gradually develops reading ability as he develops a sight vocabulary and recognizes meaningful words. His growth in this is as gradual as is in any other part of his makeup. You wouldn't ask your child to scale a ladder before his legs, muscles, and sense of balance were ready.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>
<div>Some children shinny up ladders at 2; some not until 6. It is the same with reading. It may interest you, however, to know that reading growth continues for many years, usually thru high school, and even college.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
<div>
<hr /></div>
<h3>There is some pretty shady advice in this column.</h3>
<ol>
<li>The major point, based on the expert advice, is that if your child is having trouble learning to read, stay out of it. We now have substantial research showing that parents can help their kids’ early literacy growth — a lot. Often parents are still put off by teachers with the “just read to them,” advice offered in this article … but parent involvement these days tends to be much more specific than that.<br />
<br />
Many more kids come to school reading than in the past I suspect (though without statistics for that claim), and there is clear evidence of more kids entering school knowing letter names and letter sounds. Parents can and should be involved in the teaching of their children. Obviously the reporter was put off by this strange advice — advice more based upon ideology than empirical evidence. The author had, at the age of 10, taught a struggling 7-year-old reader so she knew it could be done without harm; that’s the kind of skepticism we should all engage in.<br />
&nbsp;</li>
<li>The notion that parent help was a major impediment for struggling readers was not something that Dr. Robinson found in her landmark dissertation. She identified many precursors to reading difficulties, but too much help and attention at home did not make her list. (And, no, if parents don’t use the school district’s approach, the works will not get gummed up.)<br />
&nbsp;</li>
<li>Younger readers might be shocked by the idea that it’s okay for kids to lag in the primary grades. The advice often was stronger than that. When I was reading specialist I was called before the school board to explain why I was teaching a struggling first-grader. The notion that kids would mature into reading is certainly not a research-based idea. Kids who struggle early tend to continue to struggle and we need to intervene early to interrupt that cycle.<br />
&nbsp;</li>
<li>Still another odd notion here is that kids need to memorize a lot of sight words to learn to read. We know a better than that now. Helen Robinson was a student of William S. Gray, the senior author of the Dick and Jane Readers. Those books did not include phonics or spelling or much emphasis on sounds and letters at any point in the process, and Dr. Robinson was clearly echoing her mentor’s unproven beliefs. These days we know much more about the central role that decoding plays in early reading development.<br />
&nbsp;</li>
<li>The idea that a good approach to teaching vocabulary is to go on a naming excursion is pretty shallow, and not likely to result in kids learning the words that they need for most reading.</li>
</ol>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Despite these questionable professional insights, there were also signs of scientific thought. The journalism seems a bit confused, but it looks to me like Helen Robinson was trying to explain that IQ was NOT the major determinant of beginning reading and that kids who struggled with reading early on were not necessarily dumb.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>That was a widely held belief at the time, despite the fact that research was showing that low intelligence was not the root of most poor reading. (IQ becomes more important in reading as students get older, because the importance of vocabulary, reasoning, and memory increase as one takes on more challenging texts).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>My take away from this analysis: We are making progress. There are obviously many beliefs that were common in reading education that we have managed to grow beyond through empirical study. However, given that we continue to treat our unstudied opinions as if they were scientific findings, I suspect our future progress will be as hard won as in the past. Even with that, looking at the changes in our understanding of reading during my lifetime, it is clear that more progress is possible.</div>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/intervention-prevention" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Intervention &amp; prevention</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/parent-engagement" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Parent engagement</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/phonics-decoding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonics &amp; decoding</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/struggling-readers" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Struggling readers</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 05 Jul 2016 18:39:52 +0000tchovanec139821 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/slow-path-forward-we-can-and-do-learn-reading-research#commentsHow Can Reading Coaches Raise Reading Achievement?http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/how-can-reading-coaches-raise-reading-achievement
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>How Can Reading Coaches Raise Reading Achievement?</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-05-24T11:45:00-04:00">May 24, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div><strong>Teacher question:</strong><em> </em>I have just been hired as a reading coach in a school where I have been a third-grade teacher. My principal wants me to raise reading achievement and he says that he’ll follow my lead. I think I’m a good teacher, but what does it take to raise reading achievement in a whole school (K-5) with 24 teachers?</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><strong>Shanahan's response:</strong><br />
&nbsp;</div>
<div>It’s easy. Just do the following 9 things:</div>
<div>
<h3>1. Improve leadership</h3>
<div>Literacy leadership matters. You and your principal will need to be a team. The more the two of you know and agree upon the better. Over the next few years, your principal will be hiring and evaluating teachers, making placement and purchasing decisions, and communicating with the community. You need to be in on some of those things and you need to influence all of them. Your principal should tell the faculty that you speak for him on literacy matters and you both need to devote some time to increasing his literacy knowledge so he can understand and support your recommendations. I’d get on his calendar at least a couple of times per week to discuss strategy and debrief on what you are both doing, but also for professional development time for him.</div>
<div>
<h3>2. Increase the amount of literacy instruction</h3>
<p>How much reading and writing instruction and practice kids get is critical. Take a close look at how much of this kids are getting. Observe, talk to teachers, survey… find out how much teaching is being provided and how much reading the kids do within this teaching. Be on the look out for lost time. Mrs. Smith may schedule two hours of ELA, but she doesn’t start class until 9:12 most mornings due to late bus drop offs, milk money collection, Pledge of Allegiance, morning announcements and so on. And, her class takes a 7-minute bathroom break at about 10 each morning. She isn’t trying to teach for 2 hours, but only 1 hour 41 minutes (and the actual amount of instruction may be even less). That’s a whopping 60 hours less instruction per year than what she schedules! Try to get everyone up to 2-3 hours per day of reading and writing instruction, with a large percentage of that devoted to kids reading and writing within instruction (and, yes, a student reading aloud to the group, only counts as one student reading).</p>
<h3>3. Focus instruction on essential curriculum elements</h3>
<div>ELA often is used for wonderful things that don’t make much difference in kids learning. I watched a “phonics lesson” recently in which most of the time was spent on cutting out pictures and pasting them to a page. The amount of sounding and matching letters to sounds could have been accomplished within about 30 seconds of this 20-minute diversion. You definitely can send kids off to read on their own, but not much learning is usually derived from this. Instead, make ia commitment to obtaining substantial instruction in each of the following research-proven components for every child.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>(a) Teach students to read and understand the meanings of words and parts of words (<strong>decoding and word meaning</strong>): Dedicate time to teaching students phonological awareness (K-1, and strugglers low in those skills); phonics or decoding (K-2, or again the strugglers); sight vocabulary (high frequency words, K-2); spelling (usually linked to the decoding or word meanings); word meanings; and morphology (meaningful parts of words). &nbsp;&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>(b) Teach students to read text aloud with <strong>fluency </strong>so that it sounds like language (accuracy — reading the author’s words as written; appropriate speed — about the speed one talks normally; and proper prosody or expression — pausing appropriately, etc.).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>(c) Teach students to <strong>read with understanding</strong> and the ability to <strong>learn from text.</strong> With beginning readers this, like fluency practice, needs to be oral reading. However, by the end of Grade 1 and from then on, most reading for comprehension should be silent reading. Such instruction should teach students about text (like how it is organized, how author’s put themes in stories, or how history books differ from science books), about the kinds of information that is important (like main ideas or inferences), and ways to think about texts that will increase understanding (like summarizing along the way, or how to ask oneself questions about a text).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>(d). Teach students <strong>to write effectively.</strong>&nbsp; This would include training students in various means of getting their ideas onto paper — printing, handwriting, and keyboarding, but it also teaching them to write for various purposes (narration, exposition, argument), to negotiate the writing process effectively (planning, drafting, revising, editing), to write for a range of audiences, and to write powerful pieces (with interesting introductions, strong organizations, sufficient amounts of accurate information, etc.).</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>All four of those are detailed in your state standards, no matter where you live, but make sure that kids get lots of teaching in each. (I’d strive for roughly 25% of the instructional time into each of those baskets — that comes out to approximately 90-135 hours per year of instruction in each of those 4 things).</div>
<div>
<h3>4. Provide focused professional development</h3>
<div>I suspect this will be where much of your time is focused; making sure your teachers know how to teach those four essentials well. This might take the form of professional development workshops on particular topics, organizing teacher reading groups to pursue particular instructional issues, observing teachers and giving them feedback on their lessons, co-planning lessons with one or more teachers, providing demonstration lessons, and so on. You need to make sure that every one of your teachers knows what needs to be taught and how to teach it well.</div>
<div>
<h3>5. Make sure sound instructional programs are in place</h3>
<div>It is possible to teach reading effectively without a commercial program, but there are serious drawbacks to that approach. First, there’s the fairness issue. Programs that are shared by school staff will not make all teachers equal in their ability to teach reading, but they sure can reduce the amount of difference that exists (especially when there is adequate supervision and professional developmen — see numbers 1 and 4 above). Second, programs can ensure that kids get instruction in key areas of reading, even when teachers aren’t comfortable providing such teaching. Basically, we want to ensure that every teacher has an adequate set of lessons for productive instruction in those four key components for sufficient amounts of time. If your teachers are skilled enough to improve upon the lessons in the shared core program, then by all means support these improvements and make sure they’re shared widely.</div>
<div>
<h3>6. Align assessments</h3>
<p>It can be helpful to monitor kids learning, at least in basic skills areas that are amenable to easy assessment. It is reasonable, depending on the tests and the skills, to evaluate decoding skills or fluency ability formally 2-4 times per year. Of course, teachers can collect such information within instruction much more often than that. For instance, if a teacher is going to teach fluency for several minutes per day, why not take notes on how well individuals do with this practice and keep track of that over weeks. In any event, if we recognize that some students are not making adequate progress in these basic skills, then increasing the amount of teaching they get within class or beyond class can be sensible. The amount of testing needs to be kept to an absolute minimum, so this time can be used to improve reading.</p>
<div>
<h3>7. Target needs of special populations</h3>
<div>Often there are particular groups of kids who struggle more than others within your ELA program. Two obvious groups are second-language learners (who may struggle with academics because they are still learning English) or kids with disabilities (who struggle to learn written language). Making sure that they get extra assistance within class when possible, and beyond class (through special classes, afterschool and summer programs, etc.) would make great sense. If you are making sure that everyone in the school benefits from 2 hours per day of real reading and writing instruction, then why not try to build programs that would ensure that these strugglers and stragglers get even more? I know one coach who runs an afterschool fluency program, for instance.</div>
<div>
<h3>8. Get parent support and help</h3>
<div>Research says parents can help and that they often do. I suggest trying to enlist their help from the beginning. Many coaches do hold parent workshops about how to read to their kids, how to listen effectively to their children’s reading, how to help with homework, etc. Lots of times teachers tell me that those workshops are great, but that the parents they most wish would attend don’t show up. Don’t be discouraged. Sometimes those parents don’t get the notices (perhaps you could call them), or they work odd schedules (sometimes meetings during the school day are best for them — perhaps close to the time they have to pick their kids up from school), or they need babysitting support or translation (those one can be worked out, too).</div>
<div>
<h3>9. Motivate everybody</h3>
<div>Just like leadership (#1 above) is necessary to get any of these points accomplished, so is motivation. You have to be the number one cheerleader for every teacher’s reading instruction, for every parent’s involvement, and for every student’s learning gains. Information about what your school is up to has to be communicated to the community so that everyone can take part. Some coaches hold reading parades in their neighborhoods, others have regular reading nights where kids in pajamas come to school with mom and dad to participate in reading activities, there are young author events, lunchtime book clubs, and million minute reading challenges, etc. You know, whatever takes to keep everyone’s head in the game.&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Like I said, raising reading achievement is easy. You just have to know everything, get along with everybody, work like a horse, and keep smiling. &nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/assessment-evaluation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Assessment &amp; evaluation</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/comprehension" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Comprehension</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/ells" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">ELLs</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/ld" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">LD</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/motivation" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Motivation</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/parent-engagement" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Parent engagement</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/phonics-decoding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonics &amp; decoding</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/professional-development" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Professional development</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/school-wide-efforts" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">School-wide efforts</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/spelling" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Spelling</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/vocabulary" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Vocabulary</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/writing" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Writing</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 24 May 2016 15:59:02 +0000tchovanec139611 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/how-can-reading-coaches-raise-reading-achievement#commentsWhy I'm Not Impressed with Effective Teachershttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-im-not-impressed-effective-teachers
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Why I&#039;m Not Impressed with Effective Teachers</h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-02-29T11:15:00-05:00">February 29, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>I was making a presentation about how to raise reading achievement. I was taking my audience through research on what needed to be taught and how it needed to be taught if kids were to do as well as possible. I was telling about my experiences as director of reading of the Chicago Public Schools at a time when my teachers raised reading achievement.</p>
<p>When I finished, a teacher approached me. “What do you think is the most important variable in higher reading achievement?”</p>
<p>My answer was, “The amount of teaching — academic experience — that we provide to our children.”</p>
<p>She stared at me, horrified. “Not the teacher?”</p>
<p>We hear that a lot these days, that the trick to high quality education is excellent teachers. Who in their right mind could be against excellent teachers?</p>
<p>For example, the Center for American Progress (CAP) just released a report showing the importance of quality teachers in Pre-K through Grade 3, particularly for kids from low-income families.</p>
<p>However, I’m more interested in verbs than nouns. The focus on effective teachers — teachers, a noun — makes it seem like we just are attracting the wrong people into the profession. Man, if teachers were smarter, more teacherly, more better, than our kids would do great.</p>
<p>Contrarily, my focus is on teaching — teaching, a verb — which shifts my attention to what it means to be effective. Effective teachers are not just nicer people to be around, but they do things that less effective teachers do not.</p>
<p>For example, effective teaching employs instructional time more wisely. It is teaching that gets started right away — no 30-minute circle times, no large portions of class time devoted to getting a head start on the homework — and such teaching keeps kids productively engaged throughout the day. Observational studies have long showed that effective teaching avoids long wait times by the kids; avoids disruptions; encourages more interaction per instructional minute; follows a sound curriculum intelligently; gets a lot more reading into a lesson; explains things better; notices when kids aren’t getting it and does something about it.</p>
<p>What’s the difference?</p>
<p>I can’t teach you to be an effective teacher. But I can teach you to do the kinds of things effective teachers do. We can figure out what makes them so special and can emulate their specialness. Driving a car like Tiger Woods won’t make you a great golfer (sorry General Motors), but if you can get at what makes him great, then perhaps you can emulate that golf behavior successfully. Experts drool over his golf swing — squaring the head of the club up to the ball time after time. You might lack Tiger’s nerves and reflexes and his muscle memory developed through long hours of practice, but you can work on developing a fundamentally sound golf swing — just like Tiger’s — and that will make you a better golfer.</p>
<p>If the issue of educational effectiveness turns on effective teachers, then you either are one or you are not. If it turns on teaching effectiveness — knowing how to model effectively, to explain things clearly, to guide practice effectively, to let go at the right moment to let the students try it themselves, to review wisely — then we all have a lot to work on. Great teachers aren’t born, they’re made. Effectiveness isn’t a feature of a person, it is a goal to strive for.</p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/classroom-management" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Classroom management</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/professional-development" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Professional development</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/teacher-education" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Teacher education</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 16:26:00 +0000tchovanec139249 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/why-im-not-impressed-effective-teachers#commentsKids Need to Read Within Instruction http://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/kids-need-read-within-instruction
<div class="field field-name-title field-type-ds field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="dc:title"><h2>Kids Need to Read Within Instruction </h2></div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-pub-date field-type-datetime field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Publication date:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even"><span class="date-display-single" property="dc:date" datatype="xsd:dateTime" content="2016-01-05T10:30:00-05:00">January 5, 2016</span></div></div></section><div class="field field-name-body field-type-text-with-summary field-label-hidden view-mode-rss"><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even" property="content:encoded"><p>If you have ever had surgery, you probably have had the weird experience of signing off on a bunch of medical paperwork. The oddest form is the one that gives the surgeon permission to assault you. Think about it. Usually we don’t want people poking at us with knives. Doctors can’t do that either, unless we give our permission. Otherwise, every tonsillectomy would lead to a 911 call.</p>
<p>That means context matters. Stick a knife in someone in an OR and that is cool, do the same thing down at the local tap and you'll do 5-7 in the state penitentiary.</p>
<p>Over the years, I've challenged the notion of just having kids read on their own at school. (Or, maybe not so much challenged the notion as told people about the actual research findings on this topic which aren't so wonderful.) I’ve not been a friend to DEAR, SSR, SQUIRT, or similar schemes that set aside daily amounts of time for self selected reading in the classroom. </p>
<p>Most studies don’t find much pay off for this kind of reading — either in reading achievement or motivation to read. There are many better things to do if your goal is to encourage reading than to just tell kids to go read on their own (a directive that sounds a lot like, “go away and leave me alone").</p>
<p>So, what's the topic of my first blog entry of 2016? You guessed it: the importance of having kids read at school. That's the link to surgery. People shouldn’t stab you with a knife, except when they should. And, kids should not read at school--except when that is the smart thing to do.</p>
<p>I certainly would like kids to read a lot, especially when they are on their own — at home in the evening, on weekends, and during summer. You know, the 87% of their childhood time that they are not in school with teachers.</p>
<p>My reasoning on this is quite simple: the payoff from reading instruction is high (in terms of reading achievement), while the learning impact of just reading on one’s own is very low — especially for younger kids and struggling readers. If I have a $70,000 a year professional willing to work with my child for 6 hours a day, 185 days a year, then it would probably be better to use that time for reading instruction, and the other 87% of my child's time could be used for activities that don’t require a teacher.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean kids shouldn’t be reading in school. Of course, there are those lost minutes when kids have down time and having books available to fill the time with reading makes a lot of sense (I read when I'm waiting to see my doctor, but when she is available, I put the book aside).</p>
<p>But the really big investment in reading time in school should not be filling lost minutes. It should be a prominent part of instruction. Kids should be reading throughout their school day — during literacy instruction, during science, social studies, mathematics, health, and the arts, too.</p>
<p>I visit a lot of classrooms, and I can tell you that I don’t see much reading going on. A teacher might be teaching reading comprehension — but the reading experience is more of a round-robin oral reading activity. The same happens in a lot of subject matter textbooks, too. These activities seem to be arranged in such a way that nobody has to read much. Some kids read a few sentences or a paragraph, and then there is a lot of talking, and another kid reads for 20 seconds.</p>
<p>I have long argued for 2-3 hours per day of written language instruction, with that time divided among word work (both decoding and word meaning — words and parts of words), fluency, reading comprehension, and writing). If a teacher did that, it would mean that kids would work on reading comprehension for 2.5 hours to 3.75 hours per week (similar times would be devoted to the other components).</p>
<p>But how much of that time should be spent on reading and writing? Not talking about reading, not being told how to write, not doing anything but practicing reading and writing. The correct answer is that nobody knows. So, let’s get arbitrary about it, and decide that during the 150 minutes of reading comprehension work we are doing this week, my boys and girls will spend 75 minutes of that time reading text!</p>
<p>I think we should do the same with fluency and writing … and even with word work. There is no way that you can teach phonics effectively if you are not giving kids substantial opportunity to sound out words and non-words; reading them and trying to spell them, both in isolation and in context.</p>
<p>Just as we put the clock on the “90-minute reading block,” I think we should be putting the clock on the amount of actual reading and writing that boys and girls do within that reading block (and in their other studies).</p>
<p>Kids need to read and write, but they will do this most productively under the guidance and interaction of a skilled teacher. Unfortunately, I don’t see a sufficient amount of those kinds of reading minutes for kids to become good readers. I don’t know if 50% is the right estimate — maybe I’m undershooting. We won’t really know until we start futzing with that more intentionally than is typical in American classrooms.</p>
<p>If we want high reading achievement, we need to have kids reading and writing a lot under the supervision of teachers. Teachers, while building lesson plans, should determine how many minutes the kids will be reading, and principals and coaches during walk throughs should be looking for whether these time devotions are sufficient. </p>
<p>So, I hope you'll make this New Year's resolution: Children, within their reading and writing lessons, will spend at least half that time actually reading and writing. This could be a wonderful year for a lot of girls and boys if we followed through on such a resolution.</p>
<p>Happy New Year!</p>
</div></div></div><section class="field field-name-field-tag-cloud field-type-taxonomy-term-reference field-label-inline clearfix view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Tag cloud:&nbsp;</h2><ul class="field-items"><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/about-reading" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">About reading</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/comprehension" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Comprehension</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/content-area-literacy" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Content Area Literacy</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/curriculum-instruction" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Curriculum &amp; instruction</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/fluency" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Fluency</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/phonics-decoding" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Phonics &amp; decoding</a></li><li class="field-item even"><a href="/keywords/spelling" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Spelling</a></li><li class="field-item odd"><a href="/keywords/writing" typeof="skos:Concept" property="rdfs:label skos:prefLabel" datatype="">Writing</a></li></ul></section><section class="field field-name-field-featured field-type-list-boolean field-label-above view-mode-rss"><h2 class="field-label">Featured?:&nbsp;</h2><div class="field-items"><div class="field-item even">featured on homepage?</div></div></section>Tue, 05 Jan 2016 15:42:29 +0000tchovanec138941 at http://www.readingrockets.orghttp://www.readingrockets.org/blogs/shanahan-literacy/kids-need-read-within-instruction#comments